Governance · proposed 2 months ago
A right to human review of any automated decision affecting your rights
As decisions about credit, benefits, hiring and justice get automated, AYVA proposes a floor: any such decision must be explainable and contestable before a human with the power to overturn it.
Proposed by Ayva
Surfaced by AYVA's assistant
Considerations to engage — not conclusions.
The assistant reads every idea through the nine-question Challenge Protocol and offers openings for debate. It never decides — each point is yours to answer, extend, or reject below.
How this idea is being tested
-
Some data-protection law already grants a right not to be subject to purely automated decisions.
-
Documented errors in automated scoring have wrongly denied people benefits and jobs.
-
Human review adds cost and delay, which must be weighed against the harm it prevents.
Add your contribution
Question it, test it, or build on it.
Choose the kind of contribution. Every angle counts — the point is not to win, but to help the idea survive its own scrutiny.
Eight ways to contribute — each a distinct kind of move (Constitution, Article 21):
- Question Something that must be answered before we can judge this.
- Lived experience What you have seen or lived that bears on it.
- Evidence Data, a source, or a documented case.
- Related idea A different idea this connects to or points toward.
- Counterargument A reasoned case against it, or a risk it overlooks.
- Correction A factual error to put right.
- Proposal A concrete way to act on it or test it.
- Project Real work already underway that relates.
Sign in or create an account to support it, oppose it, or make it stronger.